Alternate BoardDocs Universe Saves the Day

Thanks to the folks at BoardDocs, we offer you an alternative site at which you can access the Sun Prairie Area School District BoardDocs info.  This is a backup site that you can access if the district's server is down (as it seems to be in this case)


http://www.boarddocs.com/wi/spasd/Board.nsf/Public 

Add this to your bookmarks.


How did BoardDocs people know to tell us?  Hmmm?
Why hasn't the school district alerted the public to the "backup" site?

What'll it be for TV? The Pack? Or the Shimek Shuffle

Tomorrow night is gonna be a tough one, folks.
Of course, there's the Packer game to watch.
But...like all those enticing new fall shows, you also have the option of seeing if Terry Shimek will once again do the Shimek Shimmy & Shuffle and change his original vote, this time voting to spend $69,000 to hire a NEW administrative position.  Just what we need...right?  For a guy that wants to be pegged a fiscal conservative, he sure changes his votes and supports a lot of administrative fluff.

And of course they say $69,000...but that's ONLY salary.  Tack on another $30,000 or so to cover benefits.
Yes...we DO need to increase the diversity of our district staff.
But...and without going into detail...this district KNOWS that there's some....shall we call it "housekeeping" to be done before we're really ready to do that.

The community is hurting, the district is in need of serious climate changing...so we think this position needs to be put on hold...as the board voted 2 weeks ago.

Minutes of the September 13, 2010 school board meeting.
5.04 Approval of a 2010-2011 Proposed Budget
Motion by John Whalen, second by Jim McCourt
 TO APPROVE THE2010-11 PROPOSED BUDGET WITH A REDUCTION OF $670,000, AND ADD
HUMAN RELATIONS AND RECRUITMENT SPECIALIST FOR $69,000.
Motion Failed
Board members who WANTED to add the position:
Yea: Caren Diedrich, Jim McCourt, John Whalen


Board members that did not
Nay: David Stackhouse, Jill Camber Davidson, John M Welke, Terry Shimek

For those keeping score at home...if this vote passes tomorrow night, you may wanna chalk up another $100,000 that the tax levy can be reduced in 2 weeks.  They can vote for it, but we, the people, do not have to support a levy to do so.

BoardDocs Fails Again...or was it an IO Error?

You know what IO means...right?
Sun Prairie School District BoardDocs site

Why is it that we spend all this money (on BoardDocs) and it seems to fail on us quite frequently? Is it the software? The firmware? Or the peopleware?  Aren't we supposed to have a highly tech-savvy staff?  Surely they could create a website that works better---and more cosistently.  Regardless, once again the district fails to have transparent mechanism for the general public to see what shenanigans are at play.

We DID catch the agenda before it went down, and we find it pretty shameful that there is no mention of the annual meeting on the agenda. Shouldn't that be an agenda item for discussion two weeks out? Maybe to share with the public key points of what they will hear?

And here's another burning question: Surely the Annual Meeting Booklets have gone to print by now. So...why isn't a PDF copy available NOW on the website?

You know this district folks....when the news isn't good, they wait until the 11th hour to release it.

Garnish Is Something Only A Chef Would Like

Something has quietly inserted itself as a staple of the district's monthly check register. And it's another one of those things that NOBODY wants to talk about. Well, we NEED to talk about it, people, because it means something.  We'll let you decide exactly what.

Sure, Chef Gordon Ramsey would be hotter than Hell's Kitchen if a dish was served sans garnishment. But we don't think he's talking about THIS type of garnish.

Go back through the district check registers (they're available via BoardDocs). We looked at the the first meeting in September going back 5 years.  Back in 2006 and 2007, we couldn't find ANY garnishment listings. Now, that might mean we missed a couple, as the school board packages back then were not offered in text-searchable PDF form. So you have to really scour them. But...in 2008, there were 3 monthly garnishment checks. 6 in 2009 and now 9 in the 2010. Something is wrong with this picture.

What is garnishment? 
A visit to every student's term paper friend, Wikipedia, yields the following:
 Wage garnishment, the most common type of garnishment, is the process of deducting money from an employee's monetary compensation (including salary), sometimes as a result of a court order. Wage garnishments continue until the entire debt is paid or arrangements are made to pay off the debt. Garnishments can be taken for any type of debt but common examples of debt that result in garnishments include:
 ---child support 
---defaulted student loans
 ---taxes 
 ---unpaid court fines


Are Increasing Garnishments a Result of the Economy?
 There sure looks to be a cause-and-effect relationship. Since we cannot be privy to the details (nor should we be...) we cannot make a definitive declaration on whether the rise in garnishments is related to people struggling financially...or whether it says something else about the district. 
 Regardless of the reason, this is something to which the board should be paying attention as they try to set a tax levy increase that will likely be 4.5% over last year. And we haven't heard anything about the Department of Revenue's equalized value statements....which do not effect the levy, but DO affect the mill rate for property taxes.

Wage Garnishments On The Rise April 2010 
As the economy continues to sour and more people fall behind on their bills, more people find themselves being sued by their creditors, or more accurately, by debt collectors...

  Garnishment Complications in a Hard Economy August 2010
The combination of a downturn in the economy and an upturn in wage attachments has created unexpected complications. It did not take a crystal ball to predict that employee garnishments would increase when employees' jobs and pay were negatively affected by the economy. But employers did not foresee how creditors and agencies would actually complicate the process by trying to "help out" debtors...

Game On!

Jeff Probst can add a new buzz word to his mantra.  In addition to OUTWIT, OUTPLAY, and OUTLAST, for this year's Annual Elector's Meeting,  it sounds like we're adding "OUTVOTE".          Last year nearly 200 electors attended.  
How many will come this year?

Will the school district/board get the tax levy they seek?

Or will they be outvoted for the second consecutive year?

For this challenge, residents need to recall the infamous letter submitted by the SPEA union in response to the board's request that they voluntarily accept ONE furlough day during the 2009-10 year:

" In an effort to show our willingness to work together, S.P.E.A has committed our organization to rally around the 2010 annual meeting in order to pass a levy that will fully finance education in the Sun Prairie Area School District. "

            --SPEA President Brad Lutes
Read the whole letter

No Doesn't Mean No Anymore

Here we go again!
After being voted down 3-4 , suddenly appearing on the Board agenda for Monday 9-27-2010 is a recommendation to hire a  HUMAN RELATIONS AND RECRUITMENT SPECIALIST 


Cost: At least $67,000 PLUS benefits

"During the budget and Edu-Jobs Program funding discussions at the Finance Committee on September 13, 2010 there was an approved motion from the Finance committee to approve the funding for this position in the 2010-2011 budget.  This motion failed on a 3-4 vote at the Board table. It was requested by Pastor Rayford to prepare a situation report to formally bring this matter to the board that would contain all of the appropriate support and background materials so this could be more adequately discussed and decided upon."

From the 9-13-2010 Meeting

TO AMEND THE MOTION AND CHANGE THE AMOUNT IN ITEM #6 TO $670,000 APPROVE THE PROPOSED 2010-2011 BUDGET AS PRESENTED WITHOUT ADDITION OF NEW PERSONNEL. ESTABLISH THE FOLLOWING AS A BUDGET PLANNING PARAMETER FOR THE 2011-2012 SCHOOL YEAR: "USE APPROXIMATELY $175,000 OF EDJOBS PROGRAM FUNDING TO RETAIN TITLE ONE ARRA FUNDED STAFF THAT WOULD HAVE TO BE LAID OFF IN SPRING 2011 FOR THE 2011-12 SCHOOL YEAR." CONSIDER THE USE OF EDJOBS PROGRAM TO FUND RETIREMENT INCENTIVES AS AN SPEA NEGOTIATIONS ITEM TO ASSIST IN THE RETENTION OF STAFF IN FUTURE YEARS. ESTABLISH THE FOLLOWING AS A BUDGET PLANNING PARAMETER FOR THE 2011-2012 SCHOOL YEAR: "TO USE THE EDJOBS PROGRAM FUNDING TO RETAIN EMPLOYEES WHO PROVIDE SCHOOL-LEVEL EDUCATIONAL AND RELATED SERVICES IN 2011-12 IN ORDER TO MAINTAIN PRESENT LEVEL OF SERVICES AND TO REDUCE THE LOCAL TAX LEVY TO THE GREATEST EXTENT POSSIBLE." EXTABLISH THE FOLLOWING AS A BUDGET PLANNING PARAMETER FOR THE 2011-2012 SCHOOL YEAR: "RECONSIDER THE POSSIBILITY OF ADDING THE FOLLOWING NEW POSITIONS FOR THE 2011-2012 SCHOOL YEAR, PENDING OVERALL BUDGET PARAMETERS AND WHEN MORE DETAILS ARE KNOWN? (A) HUMAN RELATIONS AND RECRUITMENT SPECIALIST, (B) ENGLISH LANGUAGE LEARNING STAFFING, AND (C) LITERACY COACHES."

Motion by Jill Camber Davidson, second by John M Welke.

Motion Carried

Yea: David Stackhouse, Jill Camber Davidson, John M Welke, Terry Shimek

Nay: Caren Diedrich, Jim McCourt, John Whalen

Sounds like the perfect opportunity for Terry Shimek to flipflop his original vote.


Didn't the board also vote (6-1) that the 2010-11 budget would contain NO NEW POSITIONS?
TO ACCEPT THE AMENDED MOTION RECOMMENDATIONS AS PRESENTED BY THE MANAGEMENT TEAM OF 9-2-10 APPROVE THE PROPOSED 2010-2011 BUDGET AS PRESENTED WITHOUT ADDITION OF NEW PERSONNEL.

Motion by Jim McCourt, second by John Whalen.

Final Resolution: Motion Carried

Yea: David Stackhouse, Jill Camber Davidson, Jim McCourt, John M Welke, John Whalen, Terry Shimek

Nay: Caren Diedrich

Read the Minority Recruitment plan and costs to-date. Note that the salary including benefits was listed as about $43,000 for November 2008. How did it increase to $67,000 salary alone now?

Survivor Season MMX: Teachers vs. Community?

Oh the but is scuttling!
We're hearing that, 
"... no one [at District HQ] is overly worried about the upcoming annual meeting, because [SPEA, the Teacher's Union] has enough teachers ready to save the day  "

Will this be a reward challenge?  Or an immunity challenge?

So, in the 6 year period from 2002 to 2008 between 21 and 44 "electors", most district employees, attended the  Annual Elector's Meeting.  Last year, 184 electors voted 2-1 to reduce the tax levy by $2M.  And who didn't notice that quite a few residents got tired of listening and walked out before the penultimate vote.  Not to stereotype or anything, but the folks that left sure looked like they fell into the "2" rather than the "1" camp.
There are like 540 teachers.  If each brings their spouse or significant other, that means a potential of about 1100 voters blindly supporting whatever tax levy the district puts up.  But...there are 30,000+ residents in the district, at least 50% of which are of voting age.

Questions to ponder

• Hmmm...what IS the capacity of the new Performing Arts Center?
• What IS the plan to be sure that all those that attend are eligible to vote?
• Will this really boil down to a war of who can pack the most attendees...teachers or struggling community members?
• Wanna guess who we think wins?

As one loyal reader put it,  If people want to be heard, they might try showing up instead of assuming that they know what will happen at the meeting.


The Annual Elector's Meeting 2010
Monday October 11, 2010
@ the new high school (Grove St) Performing Arts Center


Be there...or accept the consequences.

Anomaly? Or Start of a Trend?

District Administrator Tim Culver has characterized what the community did last year---a 2-1 majority vote to reduce the school district's proposed tax levy by $2M--- as an "anomaly".
Was it an anomaly?  Or the start of a trend?  Guess we'll find out for sure this October 11th, when the school district brings it's budget and a tax levy projected to rise at least 4.5% over last year, to the community at the annual elector's meeting.


This is what the school district proposed last year:
SAMPLE MOTIONS FOR 2009 – 2010

Tax Levy
I move to approve a tax levy in the amount of Forty six million, two hundred forty nine
thousand, four hundred sixty one dollars ($46,249,461) upon all taxable property in the Sun
Prairie Area School District for the purposes of operating and maintaining the district schools
and for paying for debt for school projects.

...and this is what occurred
MINUTES OF THE 2009-10 ANNUAL ELECTOR'S MEETING

Set property tax levy for the 2009-2010 school year
It was moved by Gordon Anderson, 217 E. Goodland, Sun Prairie, and seconded by Lori Hansen, 962 Broadway Dr., Sun Prairie, to approve a tax levy in the amount of forty four million, two hundred forty nine thousand, four hundred sixty one dollars ($44,249,461) upon all taxable property in the Sun Prairie Area School District for the purposes of operating and maintaining the district schools and for paying for debt for school projects. Motion carried on a ballot vote: yes – 124; no – 60.


That's a solid 2-1 margin.  The community was hurting a year ago, and the community is STILL hurting.  The economy has NOT recovered.  As board member David Stackhouse pointed out this week, "Take a look at the downtown and the amount of office space for rent".  Good point.  No business and salary/job cuts means no tax revenues and no tax revenues means state aid for schools declines.  And that means that schools have to rely on the pockets of its community members.
Yes, we are opening a new high school, and yes, it is a historic event to open a new school and be under the revenue limit--let alone $3M under the revenue limit.  But these are historic times.  And historic changes are the order of the day.
Kinda makes you wonder if maybe NOW the district/board see that building a slightly lesser TajMah High School may have been a wiser move.  Aaaaahhh...but unlike our investment returns, hindsight remains 20/20.

School Board Shows Some Love

This past Monday night, the school board finally showed some big love to the community.  The tax hike, projected to be as high as 8% last March, had been whittled down about 5.2%.  We'll not argue to what extent that was the district being frugal.  Suffice it to say that a LOT of the surplus was due to Federal Stimulus funds.  We're not looking a gift horse in the mouth.  We're just saying that the gift horse was not quite as "My Pretty Pony" as the district would have you believe.  But let's get to Monday night.
Using the EdJobs Fund NOW

First, the community, knowing the availability of new Federal Education Jobs Funds, wanted to see the money applied to THIS year's budget to further reduce the levy, and ease the struggles of its community members.  The district's plan called for saving all the money and using it next year.
At the Finance Committee meeting, a suggestion was made and approved by the committee to use about --$450K this year to cover new teachers (SPEA union) hired since August 10.  Late, at the full board meeting--in a surprise move--Terry Shimek actually motioned (and the approved) the use of a total of $670K this year to pay the costs (this year) for both new SPEA members and new Local 60 positions hired.
The board also voted to discuss in closed session a plan to use much of the remaining $1.1M to fund early retirement incentives for the longest tenured, highest paid staff.

Canceling the Chamber of Commerce Membership Dues

It may not seem like much--$1,300-- but there were so many questions, it seemed the right thing to do to cancel this membership.  After all, it is a Chamber of Commerce...and the district is a non-profit SCHOOL.  Also, many communities offer membership to the local/regional school district for a token fee.  Hint. Hint.  Sun Prairie could take a page from this book.   The bottom line is the Chamber needs the school district far more than the district needs the chamber.  It's not like we're competing for business.  If the Chamber were to change their 'tude, the community might be more willing to support membership.  It's like...it ain't happening for $1300...so, do you want a couple of hundred bucks and the district as a partner?  Or nothing? Zip. Zero. Zed.

Holding Off Hiring a New HR Administrative Position

This was a biggie because it would have meant adding ANOTHER higher paid ($67K) Administrative "Human Resources and Relations" position.  It's important to note that this was not added to the budget proposal by administration.  It came during the Finance Committee, on a motion from citizen representative Pastor Harold Rayford.  
You might recall Pastor Rayford was an unfortunate pawn in the citizen representative shenanigans last year.  He applied only to serve on the board's Human Resources committee (perhaps explaining his interest in hiring the position).  Instead, he was offered a seat on the Finance Committee, for which he did not apply, and another, highly qualified citizen (who DID apply for Finance) was passed over.
Pastor Rayford's motion to add the position into this year's budget was approved by the Finance committee, but was voted down at the school board table.
Is the new HR position needed?  Many would argue, "YES".  The position was/is earmarked to be one focused on attracting minority job applicants to our district.  Certainly Sun Prairie has grown into a very culturally diverse district.  But the district staffing composition has not grown similarly.

Net Savings

Using $670K of the EdJobs Fund money THIS year will serve to reduce the tax levy further...possibly lowering it to an increase of only 4.2-4.5% over last year.   The school board (some voices much more vocal than others) HAS made a concrete effort to respond to the community, and they deserve credit for that.
Final Analysis:  More Could Still Be Done

The bottom line---as we saw last year (cutting the levy $2M and we STILL had $1.3M surplus)--is that the district most definitely has a sizable quantity of fluff in its budget.  While we respect conservative budgeting (as we all do ourselves with our own household budgets), we all know that there's more in the checkbook than the budget calls for.  
It's soon to be placed in the community's hands.  The only question now is...was last year an anomaly?  Or will the community decide again that it needs to step in and instruct the board how much of a tax it can levy?

Here's One you HAVE To See!

Ok...we all get barraged with YouTube videos...right?
THIS one you need to watch.  It is WELL worth the time
Here's a guy from whom our school board could take a few lessons.


This is also a prime example of why past boards have been reluctant to give citizens more than 3 minutes at the microphone.  (We do appreciate that the current board seems to have ditched the infamous buzzer).  It is virtually impossible to make a strong cohesive statement which includes all the facts when under the gun.  But they know that.  They definitely do NOT want a guy like this to speak to them...or to the public.


Here's a straight shooter that's not afraid to tell it like it is.


This comes to us from a frequent reader, who says:

"Rather refreshing to see someone that will stand up to the teachers:
If only our school board president (or any member) could actually [graphic imagery censored]"

Key Budget Numbers That Have NOT Been Made Clear

Tomorrow night is your LAST kick at the cat before the Annual Meeting.
If you are concerned about the budget, you MIGHT wanna show up and speak your peace at the Finance Committee (5:30 pm).  Then stick around for the official school board vote at their 7:30 meeting



The current budget planning calls for a 0% increase [NO DECREASE] in the district Equalized Value (net value of all real property in the district).  Madison and Dane County Equalized valuations are in and the numbers point to at least a 3% decline in Equalized Value.  How does this affect property taxes?

IF the Equalized Value is "flat" 0%

Tax Levy =           $   46,535,625 x 1000 = $11.93 Mill rate 
Equalized Value= $3,901,503,850 

A  5.2% increase over 2009
Tax on a $200K home= $2,385.52

IF the Equalized Value drops 1%
Mill rate= $12.05 (+6.2%)   $2,409.62 Tax on a $200K home
IF the Equalized Value drops 2%
Mill rate= $12.17 (+7.3%)    $2,434.21 Tax on a $200K home
IF the Equalized Value drops 3%
Mill rate= $12.30 (+8.4%)     $2,459.30 Tax on a $200K home 

King of the Mountain

Why is the district planning on sitting on $1.75 MILLION dollars that landed in our laps via the Education Jobs Fund?
The folks we hear from theorize that it's being held in reserve for one of two reasons:
1. To make Tim Culver's dream Charter school come true, or
2. To use in case the community votes to reduce the proposed levy again.

Seriously...
Phil Frei comes out of the chute insisting that all this money must be spent THIS school year.  Suddenly, it's a 180 degree about face with a plan to spend not one dime this year.
Even the prospect of using some of the money to fund retirement incentives for those approaching the $100K Club is being pushed off until discussions with SPEA, which won't even begin until next spring.

So...there's NOTHING we can do with this money to help staff, help the community THIS year?
That figure represents about 2.5% of the ENTIRE budget.
If you support this district posture, school board, then shame on you.
You were elected to manage the school district AND make decision to help the community.  If your employees won't do it, then you need to do it for them.


Of course...if you'd really prefer the community do your job for you, then, by all means...we suspect that business will be taken care of come October 11.  

Time to Pull the Plug on Bottled Water?

 How many dry erase markers could we buy with $1200?
Yeah...a LOT.

One of the quiet extravangances of district staff that has built over the years is the purchase of bottled water (Pepsi's "Aquafina") for "staff development workshops.Just a quick glance at check runs for the past year reveals that AT LEAST $1200 has been spent on bottled water.  But nobody cares.


Only district resident Roger Fetterly has steadfastly questioned this expense at Finance Committee meetings.  But it's clear that board members simply tune Fetterly out.  You may not like him or his message, board members, but he has a valid point.
Why are we paying like $1.50 per bottle when we get the same thing --or better-- FREE from our tap.


Bottled water isn't regulated in this state....or many others.
Bottled water IS tap water....with a fancy label and a non-eco-friendly plastic bottle.
Bottled water contains things like plasticizers (chemists call them phthalates)


Review Sun Prairie's Water Quality from the DNR's website (Trust Us; It's Good)
The DNR maintains a list of the most recent Consumer Confidence Reports for all Wisconsion Public Water Supply systems.  They also provide excellent guidance on how to read these things.


http://prodoasext.dnr.wi.gov/reports/rwservlet?reportserver&envid=ws582&report=q582_ccr.rdf&i_pws_id_qy=%20and%20inv.pws_id%20=%20'11302588'&i_internal_user=N

If they're going to turn down the thermostats in teachers' classrooms because of cost savings, then the least we can do at the district level is to replace bottled water with good old tap water.








Want a Thought Provoking Laugh?  Check Out Penn && Teller's Bottled Water Exposé 

Would YOU Spend $200K to Save $1,000,000?

Are you kidding us?  Who WOULDN'T?

Here are some simple numbers:
1. The top 20 highest paid SPEA members will each be at least 57 (minimum state retirement age) in 2011.
2. The top 20 highest paid SPEA members will each have at least 32 years in  by 2011.
3. That qualifies EACH of them for 100% Wisconsin Retirement System benefits.
4. Their combined salaries cost over $1.53M annually (and + 3.5 to 4% per year).
5. Their combined benefits cost over $560K annually.
6. 20 senior staff members cost us over $100K EACH per year.
Imagine if:
1. We used $200K of the $1.75M Education Jobs Fund money to offer each of these people $10,000 to commit to retiring at the end of the 2010-11 school year.
2. That wipes $2.1M of costs (salaries + benefits) off the books.
3. Now say we replace them with teachers making even...say...$40,000.
4. New salary cost would be $800,000----instant $730K savings.
5. New benefits costs would be about $290K....instant $275K savings.

Those moves would reduce our school district budget by over $1M.
Those moves would create jobs for fresh, energized teachers.
Those moves would not hurt the retirees; typically retirees make out better in retirement.  And they've done their time.
And the best part is that the savings keep on getting better.  It's far more of a burden to carry $80K, 30+ year employees on the payroll than $40K, younger staff.


So...why isn't this a "gimme"?
We get it...some of you are saying...but why are we giving them $10K each?
BECAUSE IT'S NOT EVEN OUR MONEY!  
This is a once in a LONG LONG time opportunity.


But the district only wants to "consider it" in closed session.  The following is taken from the Situation Report for this Monday night:

The following recommendations were adopted by the Management Team on 9-2-10.

3. To consider the use of EdJobs program to fund retirement incentives as an SPEA negotiations item to assist in the retention of staff in future years.

Retirement Incentives. These funds present an opportunity to consider negotiation of retirement incentives w ith the SPEA. Such actions might reduce the long-term costs of SPEA staff ing, thus helping to retain future jobs. As this would need to be a negotiated item, [Says WHO?] the administration would like to discuss this option or possibility further in closed session tonight.

And why does the district feel offering a retirement incentive has to be negotiated?
It's called an OPTION, folks.  No one HAS to take it.  It's optional.  That's kinda the way an option works.   In fact, it serves as the basis of many powerful offenses in football. [Gratuitous football reference]

Therefore, being an OPTION --as opposed to a FORCE, it does NOT need to be negotiated.
Simply state that the offer is eligible to anyone of retirement age that meets retirement requirements.  In fact...offer it on a first come, first serve basis.  Create incentive to retire early and retire often.

Boo Frick'n Hoo!

Pardon our French.
But seriously... we have had just about enough of this whining.


Who's whining now?
Well...since you asked...we're hearing that the Administrative Support staff are not happy with the package presented to them last night:

• 1%  pay raise
• pay 1% more towards the cost of health insurance premiums
• pay 2% more towards the cost of dental insurance premiums

We guess that, seeing that the district just received $1.75M from the feds, they believed that the candy store was back open for business.  Someone...a spokesperson for the group?...noted that the lowliest staffer will only receive a net $0.04 to $0.10 hourly increase.

---

An astute reader pointed out to us that the Admin Support staff ALSO gained a furlough day back AND get an increase that relates to where they fit on the "grid".

DOUBLE Boo Frick'n Hoo!

---

Again...BOO FRICK'N HOO!  Many people saw either NO increase or had their wages cut, or lost their jobs!!!!  What makes school district employees so damn special?
Welcome to the recession, folks.  Under the dome under which the school district seems to reside, things may be rosy.  But, for the rest of us, here in the real world, not so much.


Be happy you are employed....others aren't so lucky.
Be happy that you are actually getting a raise...many others got no raise and furlough days.
Be happy that you aren't having to pay as much towards healthcare as state employees or (heaven forbid) Local 60 staff.


These are the same people that received a very nice new pay grid LAST SUMMER.
Click here to see the salary grid...see if YOU think they are underpaid.



When is the sense of entitlement that runs rampant through this district going to end?



Maybe Y'all Can Keep These in Mind


Do you people not read the papers?

Have you ANY clue as to the state of the economy?

http://www.channel3000.com/money/24831004/detail.html  Wolf/SubZero Cutting 100 Madison Jobs [9-1-10]

http://www.channel3000.com/news/24922576/detail.html Harley-Davidson Could Cut 200 Jobs ]9-8-10]

http://www.nbc15.com/home/headlines/101414594.html Meriter Cutting 57 Jobs [9-3-10]

3-5% cuts for all Dane County employees

Loss of 2% raise plus 3% cut (16 furlough days) for state employees  in both 2010 and 2011




Sorry folks, but we...have had...ENOUGH!

Would the Board Reject an Opportunity to Fund Equity?

OK...so we have $1.75M of Education Job Fund cash.
Most definitely, we need to be careful not to be pennywise and pound foolish.
Ultimately, the best leverage of this opportunity is to fund FUTURE savings.
But more on that to come.


What COULD be done is to take this opportunity, with $3.4M in (theoretically) unspent money and address our equity problem...you know...with the 300+ Local 60 members.  And, the move could be paid for with other savings...we don't even have to touch the EdJobs Fund stash.  And that's what makes this a good move.  A fair move.  Here's the lowdown:


Step 1:  We need to define "target" percentages for healthcare copays.
Say our "target" is 6% of health and 10% of dental

Admin (now) pays 6% and 2% respectively

Local 60 [L60] pays 9% and 14.5%%

Step 2:  Get Local 60 to the targets.

If we REDUCED L60 copays to 6% health (drop 3%) and 10% dental (drop 4.5%),

it would cost us $150,000 this year.

....and certainly that's not a figure to take lightly.

Step 3:  Funding the plan.

If we used the EdJobs cash, it would take about  8% of the $1.75M...

BUT...we could fund it differently.  Consider this:

The savings we incurred from just Admin and Admin Support alone (1% vs. 2% budgeted raises + increase health/dental copays)

comes to about $50,000.

There's 1/3 of the cost already.

Now...salaries for L60 last year were about $7.9M

That means we budgeted about $160K for their [potential] (2%)  raises

If we only give them 1%, we save $80K; now we have "saved" $130K of the $150K cost to reduce their copays.

Not close enough...so what if offer them a 0.75% pay raise ($ave$ us $100K from planned 2% raise).

So....imagine the good will that would be garnered with a package deal of 0.75% raise, -3% health and -4.5% dental!

This package sets the bar --for now anyway--- at 6% health / 10% dental

It pays for itself in THIS budget by virtue of Admin and Admin Support budget savings.

The bottom Line- Putting $$$ in the pockets of those hurting most

It puts about $500 in each L60 member's pocket per year from less insurance costs.

It puts about $175/yr NEW money in their pockets from the 0.75% raise.

for someone making less than $25K, putting $675 in their pockets means a lot.

And we haven't used 1 dime of what the teachers savings would be.

Paying 2% more towards insurance will save us $168K per year

Food for thought

       Assuming every employee takes family health & dental insurance

Admin staff earn an average of $51/hr and pay $937/yr out of pocket

Admin Support staff earn an average of $29/hr and pay $786/yr out of pocket

Teachers (SPEA) earn, on average, $32/hr and pay $273/yr out of pocket

L60 folks earn an average of about $15/hr yet they pay $1,573/yr out of pocket

Final Thoughts

Yeah....we know...this is crazy...right?

Why would we ever consider funding MORE of an employee unit's health care?

Or, as one community member put it, "If Local 60 was dumb enough to agree to what they pay, then they need to live with it".

So why then?  Has SP-EYE been sippin' the Kool-Aid?

It's really as simple as equity.  

We need to treat all our employees more equitably.

That means teachers need to pay MORE and Local 60 should be reduced to an equity point.  THEN. over time, we can increase all groups unilaterally.

Does the school district wish to be renowned as a fair and principled place to work?

Or would it rather be viewed as a caste system?

Chronicles of Snarlya: The Budget, The Hidden Cash, and OurDough Pants

Over $4M in additional Revenues --- Where's it Going?

If you've been paying attention, a LOT....let us say that again...a LOT of unexpected money has come into the district since the last budget hearing 5 weeks ago.  Has anyone seen a copy of the budget lately?  Didn't think so.  We hear and see snippets, but NOT the whole shooting match.

By our math, at least $4.1M of unexpected money has come onto the scene in recent weeks.  About 75% of that, of course, comes from the $1.75M Education Jobs Fund and the $1.3M surplus from the 2009-10 year.  As far as we know, only $700K has been committed to the 2010-11 budget.  That leaves $3.4 MILLION.

What are we doing with all that money??

You know...if, according to the most recent documents, the tax levy is about $2.3M over last year, and we have $3.4M of unspent money..... hmmmm...why do we even need a 5.2% tax levy increase?   We COULD have a 0% increase, couldn't we?

Who IS Minding Our Money?

In a perfect --transparent-- world, the district would have a "live" budget available on the website that changes as the Powers That Be make changes regarding how to use available monies.  Don't tell us that isn't possible--we know better.  The ONLY reason for treating the community like a crop of mushrooms (you know...keeping us in the dark and feeding us bull$h!t) is because they don't like the way things would look when subjected to daylight.

There is a bunch of cash available and their best move is to encumber it quickly and quietly in such a way that it's hard to reverse course.

Back to School Style - The SPASD Way
Another school year, another fad.  Cargo pants have been the rage for a number of years now. A community member shared with us an amusing analogy that relates fashion to the district budget.   Clearly there is and has been a lot of fluff in the school district budget.  How else can one possibly explain the "dire straits" the community put the district in last year by slashing the proposed tax levy by $2M...only to have us wind up with $1.3M surplus!


Here's a better example. With the recent administration 1% pay raise approval, an astute community member thought to request a copy of the "costing" documents associated with the raises.  If you look at the documents, you see that the raises (1%) cost about $25K to fund.  But...more importantly...the documents also show a SAVINGS (from budget) of $25K.  Hey!  Guess what?  If the 1% raises cost the same amount as the savings, that means that the district had budgeted for 2% raises.  And...since the district typically uses the same figure for all groups, we now know the "magic" number: 2%.  The real question, of course, is:  if the budget includes funding for 2% across the board, and the school board holds firm at 1%....doesn't that leave a lot of unspent funds in the budget?  


Clearly, the budget has room to move.  The community member liked the budget to cargo pants, complete with oh so many pockets.  When Phil Frei is suddenly able to "find" money in the budget to pay for some new administrative want, he just pulls another wad of cash out of his cargo pants.  We took the concept one step further.  Since it's really OUR money, perhaps we should coin a phrase and call them "OURDOUGH" pants.   We'd sell a million...or maybe $3.3 million, to be more accurate.

OK...to be fair, we DO expect some degree of flexibility within a budget.  Just like when we prepare our own household budgets, we tend to project/plan for slightly higher costs to cover those occasions when things pop up unexpectedly.  Like when you don't budget for a sudden $500 car repair bill.  Most of us can breathe a little easier if/when these things occur because we DID build a little bit of fluff in the budget.  Call it a "contingency fund" if you will.

The problem is that the school district needs to be more transparent than they are.  They need to be much more upfront in terms of where the contingency money is, how much it is, and what will be done with it if, at the end of the year, we don't have to tap into it. 

Livin' the dream, baby...livin' the dream